[LLVMdev] An LLVM 1.3 Request

[Chris Lattner]

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004, Reid Spencer wrote:

> There is an outstanding bug, #257, pertaining to separating out the
> detailed testing infrastructure from the main LLVM code. I would like to
> see fixed in the 1.3 release time frame. The bug can be found here:
> http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=257

I think that we would all like to see this bug fixed for 1.3.  :)  That
said, we've all been really busy with a variety of things, and I don't
think there are any definite plans to do it.

> I would have taken this one and done the work necessary but
> unfortunately I don't have CVS rights and this is almost completely a
> CVS job.

Well there are two big parts to it: changing the configure scripts and
makefiles to work differently, and actually moving the files.  The biggest
part is changing the configure/makefile machinery... by contrast, moving
the directory is easy.  :)

> There are a number of ancillary tasks that need to be done in
> conjunction with this task. Things like:
>
> - change configure.ac to _not_ support options that affect testing only.
>   For example: --enable-spec200, --enable-spec95, --enable-povray.
>
> - change Makefiles to not build "test"
>
> - decide which portion(s) of test/Regression remain or are moved.
>
> I would like to volunteer to help with these things but it doesn't make
> sense without someone else to do the necessary CVS changes that go with
> it.

Yes, definitely.  I think the right way to do this is to make it be as
incremental as possible.  In particular, the biggest benefit will be to
get llvm/test/Programs into a seperate tarball from the main LLVM tree, as
it is big and will (hopefully!) keep getting bigger.  There are several
tasks that can be done incrementally to help out with this:

1. Make test/Programs be self contained, including not depending on
   makefiles in directories above it.
2. It should have its own (small) configure script, just like the other
   projects do.
3. It should "act" as if it were in llvm/projects/TestPrograms or
   something.  Before the files are actually moved, this can be simulated
   with a symlink.

Once these three are done, it should just be a matter of moving the CVS ,v
files from llvm/test/Programs into llvm/projects/TestPrograms, and then
into a seperate CVS module when that works goes well.

I attached a small draft of one vision of a future LLVM directory layout
to the end of PR257.  Please take a look and add a comment if you think
that something else would make sense.

> The end goal of this change is to minimize the size of a standard
> distribution of LLVM and make configuration and building easier.

This is *clearly* a useful change :)

> What's the likelihood that someone could do this for 1.3,

At this point, I would not say that it's particularly likely that someone
will do it straight out for 1.3.  If you'd like to send in some patches
for the three items above, we would be happy to apply them, and when the
time comes, do the big move.  If you get it to the point where we just
have to move the files, I can guarantee that it will be done by 1.3.  :)

> or the likelihood that I could get CVS access and do it myself?

At this point, sending in patches is probably the easiest thing to do.
Figuring out how to set up the permissions, deal with the politics of
giving external access to university machines, and other annoying details
is just not something that is very appealing to me, and the actual CVS
work is pretty small.

-Chris

-- 
http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/
http://www.nondot.org/~sabre/Projects/